Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Bush Admin Plans to Install Black Box Sensors on Private Computer Networks

Posted by Peter Swire, Think Progress at 11:38 AM on February 5, 2008.


This proposal repeats the mistakes of the Federal Intrusion Detection Network, which proposed similar monitoring of private systems in 1999.
fsia

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

The Bush administration wants to place more black boxes on private-sector computer networks. We've already learned a lot about the NSA wiretap program and its Narus STA 6400 splitter -- that's the black box that AT&T whistleblower Mark Klein reported the NSA placed at a major node for voice and Internet communications (inside this secret room).

The president's budget wants to go much further. It moves beyond telcos and allocates $6 billion for a secretive system that is designed to protect government and private computer systems from attack. According to the Wall Street Journal, the White House proposal "would likely require the government to install sensors on private, company networks."

This proposal repeats the mistakes of the Federal Intrusion Detection Network, which proposed similar monitoring of private computer systems when it was proposed in 1999. That aspect of FIDNet was quickly withdrawn, for at least three good reasons:

1. Private companies are understandably reluctant to permit the government to attach unknown hardware or software to their corporate systems. The risks of security breach and operational problems are too high, especially given the long history of computer security failures by the federal agencies themselves.

2. Direct federal intervention in private computer systems raises innumerable legal and policy issues about privacy, the Fourth Amendment, and the scope of government surveillance.

3. The new proposal ignores the sensible principles for cybersecurity that were adopted in the wake of the FIDNet fiasco and built into the Federal Computer Incident Response Center. Quite simply, the federal government should adopt best security practices that apply to private systems.

Under the better approach, the federal government should adopt state-of-the-art intrusion detection software and other measures for its own systems to combat intrusions into federal systems. The federal government should not, however, try to install its equipment into private systems.

Digg!

Tagged as: technology, computers, bush administration, wiretapping

Peter Swire, is a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress and served as the Clinton Administration’s Chief Counselor for Privacy.


Dems' Godly God-Fest Ends with Prayer by Former Christian Coalition Leader
A leader among the "New Evangelicals."
Post by Joshua Holland. August 29, 2008.
John McCain is Older Than Alaska
23 years older.
Post by Isaac Fitzgerald. August 29, 2008.
Palin Thinks Hillary is a Whiner
These days Palin is all about praising Hillary's efforts, but she used to sing a different tune.
Post by Melissa McEwan. August 29, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Deb
Posted by: debmcd on Feb 5, 2008 12:15 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Please. How stupid do you have to be to believe that the government, especially this Administration is putting boxes on private companies' networks to protect the government. Yeah right. Didn't I just see a flock of flying pigs? If they were truly interested in protecting the information they've already stolen from us, they should look into softwear and hardware to install on their systems not everywhere but. Geez, they must think that everyone is a Republican and doesn't have a thought of their own. You may be able to fool Republicans all the time, but not so free thinking Democrats.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh, Big Brother, Where Art Thou?
Posted by: QQOblivion on Feb 5, 2008 12:31 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maybe the telecoms that helped Big Brother spy on Americans without warrants will have black-boxes installed on their own internal corporate networks, therefore exposing company secrets for the good of American "homeland security". Ha! That would serve them right.
Well, maybe the telecoms will get a pass, sadly, since they are in this conspiracy together with the Bush administration. But I can dream, can't I?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Willing Co-conspirators Posted by: Xynyx
This'll go nowhere fast
Posted by: Techubus on Feb 5, 2008 12:59 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There isn't an (respectable) IT security expert in this Country that would ever support this. The private sector has always been ahead of the curve in network security when compared to the government; the only exception being the military.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This will be a Bush trend of '08
Posted by: doinaheckuvajob on Feb 6, 2008 1:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Expect to see more of these type of measures by the Bush Crime Family, extending their Neocon methods of control and surveillance further into a private sector/government linkage as Bush/Cheney spin out of government and further into socioeconomic structures.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

black box
Posted by: KaptainSpiffy on Feb 6, 2008 3:03 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
i expected at least ONE condoleeza rice joke . . .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: black box Posted by: walldodger1969
Back during the
Posted by: bitsfick on Feb 6, 2008 3:22 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
second world war, the Germans had their enigma machine, these people were so arrogant and conceited they thought no one could crack their code. They were wrong!!! The British cracked the enigma, and the Americans cracked the Japanese code. Always remember and don't ever forget, no matter how smart you are, there is always someone just a little bit smarter. Right now someone is trying to figure out how to subvert or pervert these machines to their own ends. Many years ago, I installed a cypher lock, and the manufacturer's rep told me there was no way I could figure out the code for that lock. He was wrong too, it took me twenty seconds. Just imagine what someone who knows what they are doing could do with these black boxes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Little Dictator marches on.
Posted by: monkeywrench on Feb 6, 2008 9:59 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't worry, everybody; Congress is on the job, and they will "do the right thing."

For Bush.

Count on him to get his way, as he has for the last seven years, thanks to the most cowardly congress in our history. I am bereft of logic to explain the level of inaction by congress; I can only speculate that it either has to do with them all being owned by corporate masters and thus are actually paid slaves, or that they are being directly (and possibly physically) intimidated by the Bush neocons. Or both.

Either way, we might as well just chant our mantra "just one more year, just one more year," and pray McCain is not the replacement ––– that is, if Bush and Cheney actually leave office. (Stay tuned for another terrorist attack, or even a nullified election.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What legal and policy issues about privacy, the Fourth Amendment ?
Posted by: Bruce Bartlett on Feb 6, 2008 2:33 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This Administration has completely overpowered and obliterated any legal and policy issues about privacy, the Fourth Amendment, and the scope of government surveillance.

This Administration does what it wants to whom it wants, when it wants to, then it just destroys the emails and clams up when asked to come clean.

And no one, even our newly elected Congress, holds or can hold them accountable for it.

Our Nation has been demolished from within.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]